Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T04:22:13.235Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What do I choose? Influence of interlocutor awareness on bilingual language choice during voluntary object naming

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 July 2018

KEERTHANA KAPILEY  and
RAMESH KUMAR MISHRA
KEERTHANA KAPILEY
Affiliation:
Centre for Neural and Cognitive Sciences, University of Hyderabad, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, Telangana, India500046
RAMESH KUMAR MISHRA*
Affiliation:
Centre for Neural and Cognitive Sciences, University of Hyderabad, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, Telangana, India500046
*
Address for correspondence: Professor Ramesh Kumar Mishra, Center for Neural and Cognitive Science, University of Hyderabadrkmishra@uohyd.ac.in
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In two experiments with Telugu–English bilinguals, we examined if bilingual speakers are sensitive towards an interlocutor's (cartoon) relative language proficiency when they voluntarily selected a language for object naming. After familiarization with four different cartoons with varied L2 proficiency, participants did a voluntary naming task. In Experiment 1, participants explicitly indicated their choice of language before naming objects. In Experiment 2, participants named the objects directly. In both experiments, language choices and switchrates were thoroughly modulated by the participants’ perceived linguistic ability of the cartoon. However, awareness of perceived proficiency of the cartoons did not modulate naming latency. These results provide strong support for the adaptive control hypothesis, showing that bilingual speakers are sensitive to their interlocutor's language needs and this influences how they plan their language use. The results provide evidence of speakers taking into consideration the language proficiency of interlocutors, suggesting extreme adaptability of the bilingual mind.

Keywords

bilingualismadaptive controllanguage proficiencyvoluntary naming
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 22 , Issue 5 , November 2019 , pp. 1029 - 1051
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

We thank Seema Prasad for significant help in manuscript preparation and editing and Sangeeth for preparing the animation of the cartoons.

Supplementary material can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728918000731

References

Arrington, C. M., & Logan, G. D. (2004). The cost of a voluntary task switch. Psychological Science, 15 (9), 610–615.10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00728.xGoogle Scholar
Arrington, C. M., & Logan, G. D. (2005). Voluntary task switching: chasing the elusive homunculus. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31 (4), 683.Google Scholar
Arrington, C. M., Reiman, K. M., & Weaver, S. M. (2014). Voluntary task switching. Task switching and cognitive control, 117–136.10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199921959.003.0006Google Scholar
Bhatia, D., Prasad, S. G., Sake, K., & Mishra, R. K. (2017). Task Irrelevant External Cues Can Influence Language Selection in Voluntary Object Naming: Evidence from Hindi-English Bilinguals. PLoS ONE 12 (1): e0169284. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0169284Google Scholar
Bhatia, T. K., & Ritchie, W. C. (2016). Emerging trilingual literacies in rural India: Linguistic, marketing, and developmental aspects. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 19 (2), 202–215.10.1080/13670050.2015.1037719Google Scholar
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511620539Google Scholar
Demanet, J., and Liefooghe, B. (2014). Component processes in voluntary task switching. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 67, 843–860. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2013.836232Google Scholar
Dolk, T., Hommel, B., Prinz, W., & Liepelt, R. (2013). The (not so) social Simon effect: a referential coding account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39 (5), 1248.Google Scholar
Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 35, 116–124.10.3758/BF03195503Google Scholar
Gambi, C., & Pickering, M. J. (2013). Talking to each other and talking together: Joint language tasks and degrees of interactivity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36 (04), 423–424.10.1017/S0140525X12001926Google Scholar
Gambi, C., & Hartsuiker, R. (2016). If you stay, it might be easier: Switch costs from comprehension to production in a joint switching task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition. 42 (4), 608–626.Google Scholar
Gollan, T. H., & Ferreira, V. S. (2009). Should I stay or should I switch? A cost–benefit analysis of voluntary language switching in young and aging bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35 (3), 640.Google Scholar
Gollan, T. H., Kleinman, D., & Wierenga, C. E. (2014). What's easier: Doing what you want, or being told what to do? Cued versus voluntary language and task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143 (6), 2167.10.1037/a0038006Google Scholar
Green, D. W., & Abutalebi, J. (2013). Language control in bilinguals: The adaptive control hypothesis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25 (5), 515–530.10.1080/20445911.2013.796377Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. (2001). The bilingual's language modes. In Nicol, J. (Ed.), One mind, two languages: Bilingual language processing (pp. 1–22). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hartsuiker, R. J., & Declerck, M. (2009, September). Albert Costa y Julio Iglesias move up, but Fidel Castro stays put: Language attraction in bilingual language production. In AMLaP 2009 conference, Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
Iwashita, N., Prior, M. T., Watanabe, Y., & Lee, S. K. (2010). Features of oral proficiency in task performance by EFL and JFL learners. In Selected proceedings of the 2008 second language research forum (pp. 32–47), Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar
Ma, F., Chen, P., Guo, T., & Kroll, J. F. (2017). When late second language learners access the meaning of L2 words: Using ERPs to investigate the role of the L1 translation equivalent. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 41, 50–69.10.1016/j.jneuroling.2016.09.006Google Scholar
Martin, C. D., Molnar, M., & Carreiras, M. (2016). The proactive bilingual brain: Using interlocutor identity to generate predictions for language processing. Nature Scientific Reports (6), 26171.Google Scholar
Mohanty, A. K., & Central Institute of Indian Languages. (1994). Bilingualism in a multilingual society: Psycho-social and pedagogical implications. Mysore: Central Institute of Indian Languages.Google Scholar
Molnar, M., Ibáñez-Molina, A., & Carreiras, M. (2015). Interlocutor identity affects language activation in bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 81, 91–104.10.1016/j.jml.2015.01.002Google Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M. (2012). Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid Lexical Test for Advanced Learners of English. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 325–343.10.3758/s13428-011-0146-0Google Scholar
Lennon, P. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning, 40 (3), 387–417.10.1111/j.1467-1770.1990.tb00669.xGoogle Scholar
Li, Y., Yang, J., Scherf, K. S., & Li, P. (2013). Two faces, two languages: An fMRI study of bilingual picture naming. Brain and language, 127 (3), 452–462.10.1016/j.bandl.2013.09.005Google Scholar
Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2016). Action speaks louder than words, even in speaking. Cognitive Control and Consequences of Multilingualism, 2, 127.10.1075/bpa.2.06phiGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1992). Psychological mechanisms underlying second language fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 357–385.10.1017/S0272263100011189Google Scholar
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49 (1), 93–120.10.1111/1467-9922.00071Google Scholar
Singh, N., & Mishra, R. K. (2015). The modulatory role of second language proficiency on performance monitoring: evidence from a saccadic countermanding task in high and low proficient bilinguals. Frontiers in Psychology, 5:1481.Google Scholar
Singh, N., & Mishra, R. K. (2013). Second language proficiency modulates conflict-monitoring in an oculomotor Stroop task: Evidence from Hindi-English Bilinguals. Frontiers in Psychology, 4:322.Google Scholar
Singh, N., & Mishra, R. K. (2012). Does language proficiency modulate oculomotor control? Evidence from Hindi-English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15 (4), 771–781.10.1017/S1366728912000065Google Scholar
Snodgrass, J. G., & Vanderwart, M. (1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures: norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 6 (2), 174–215.Google Scholar
Woumans, E., Martin, C. D., Bulcke, C. V., Assche, E. V., Costa, A., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Duyck, W. (2015). Can faces prime a language? Psychological Sciences. 26 (9), 1343–52.10.1177/0956797615589330Google Scholar
Zhang, S., Morris, M. W., Cheng, C. Y., & Yap, A. J. (2013). Heritage-culture images disrupt immigrants’ second-language processing through triggering first-language interference. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110 (28), 11272–11277.10.1073/pnas.1304435110Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Kapiley and Mishra supplementary material

Kapiley and Mishra supplementary material 1

Download Kapiley and Mishra supplementary material(File)
File 82.5 KB